EQUITY PLEADING. The system of pleading adopted in equity by the English Court of Chan cery was derived partly from the common-law system and partly from the civil-law system as administered by the English ecclesiastical courts.
The important features of the civil-law system which characterize equity pleading were: (a) the absence of the denial or traverse, the rule being that all the allegations in a pleading were deemed to be denied unless expressly admitted by a subsequent pleading, which was exactly the converse of common-law rule by which all the allegations in a pleading were deemed to be admitted unless expressly denied; and (b) the practice by which a party to the litigation could compel his opponent to testify, or give discovery, as it was called, in advance of argument or trial as to the matters alleged in the first party's plead ing.
The plaintiff's pleading in an equity action is called the bill. In effect it is a petition ad dressed to the court asking that subpmna issue compelling the defendant to answer the bill. Formerly hills in equity were prepared with great formality and were usually composed of nine distinct parts. Of these, however, only four are important in modern practice, and two of these may he dispensed with. The essential parts are the statement of facts and the prayer for relief.
For the purpose of obtaining discovery the plaintiff might state in his bill at great length the evidence upon which he relied in support of his claim. This was known as the charging part of the bill. Ile might also ask specific questions founded upon the stating and charging parts of the bill, which he required the defendant to answer. This was known as the interrogatory part of the bill. After the appearance of the defendant, failing which a decree would be taken against him by default, lie was required to answer the bill. The answer, which was required to be
under oath, might set out at length any matters of defense, however numerous, relied upon by defendant, but he was required to make dis covery or give testimony by answering fully and' specifically the charging and interrogatory parts of the bill.
In early times other pleadings might follow the answer as at common law, but ultimately the answer came to the last substantial pleading, and was followed only by a formal plea always of the same' tenor and used only to indicate that the parties were at issue.
In case it became necessary for the plaintiff to meet any of the allegations in the answer, this was accomplished by amendment. Upon the testimony taken before a master in chancery, and upon the answer, which was deemed to he not only a pleading. but in effect evidence introduced by the plaintiff, the decision and final decree of the Court of Chancery were based.
Equity pleading borrowed from the common law the use of the demurrer and the plea, with practically the same effect.
In the courts of equity of the United States, which, in accordance with the Constitution and statutes of the United States, are distinct from the courts of common law, the same system of pleading is used as in the English Court of Chancery as it has here been outlined. The pleading in the United States courts is, however, subject to modification by rules of court. The same system of equity pleading also obtains in those States in which the distinction between courts of equity and of law has been maintained, notably New Jersey.